Too bad. Was waiting for part 2. Looking at his older ones again, there is a bunch of clips from NFL, ESPN and even Seahawks.com content. Was wondering how he was able to host them on Youtube since there is such a large audience, you knew it was going to get back to the NFL and other folks that had their IP recorded in these videos. I guess he is going to dispute the Content claim but eventually he is going to lose. That will affect his standing which would eventually limit how much content can be uploaded at one time or eventual banning.

drdiags wrote:Too bad. Was waiting for part 2. Looking at his older ones again, there is a bunch of clips from NFL, ESPN and even Seahawks.com content. Was wondering how he was able to host them on Youtube since there is such a large audience, you knew it was going to get back to the NFL and other folks that had their IP recorded in these videos. I guess he is going to dispute the Content claim but eventually he is going to lose. That will affect his standing which would eventually limit how much content can be uploaded at one time or eventual banning.

I can understand Youtube's position.

It's not Youtube's position, it's the NFL, ESPN, etc. (i'm sure you know this but your post makes it sound like Youtube is the primary roadblock).

Sometimes you just hope that they'll see something like this for what it is. A very effective marketing tool in at least one of their markets that costs them nothing to produce and/or distribute. If anything, they should learn from things like this.

Start producing films such as this, tailored for their teams' markets (similar to commercials for NFL Insiders where they appear to be having a conversation in front of a green screen, ESPN simply throws some Seahawk specific video/audio in over the top and airs it in our market).

C-Dub wrote:Wonder why episode 1 and 3 are still up, and 2 is breaking rules.

I think it also could be if any music accompanied the video. I had a frame grab of some NFL stuff but the grabber I had grabbed my background iTunes playlist that I was listening to. A previous one had no music and was not flagged. The second one immediately got a notification from Youtube about all the song titles in it being a violation of Content ID. Lower down the list they indicated that the video itself might be a violation since it was NFL property.

I acknowledged the Content ID issue but noticed I was flagged as a bad guy, so I just removed the two private videos. Whatever DRM s/w Youtube has is pretty good but I wonder if it is more in-tune with catching audio issues? Never got a chance to do much in the DRM arena, had a interview with a local company that was doing a cool port onto multiple h/w platforms and they were looking for embedded developer types. Almost got in the door.

that's what I was wondering...googled it but couldn't come across anything...my guess is it wont, due to the fact that Mr. Cornell probably wants to lay low and see how this all plays out. Unless someone is really cool with him and has access to it, we probably will have to wait. Even if one of us had access to it, wouldn't want him to get in trouble either. Sucks anyway you cut it.

Everyone complaining about the 'EVIL NFL BOO!' needs to realize that this footage was compiled from a bunch of different sources and networks and if any of them complained, it would be taken down. It's not just the NFL.

Hawknballs wrote:Everyone complaining about the 'EVIL NFL BOO!' needs to realize that this footage was compiled from a bunch of different sources and networks and if any of them complained, it would be taken down. It's not just the NFL.

But none of it was reproduced as originally aired, and was in fact used to create something new, which as I understand it constitutes "fair use".

Hawknballs wrote:Everyone complaining about the 'EVIL NFL BOO!' needs to realize that this footage was compiled from a bunch of different sources and networks and if any of them complained, it would be taken down. It's not just the NFL.

But none of it was reproduced as originally aired, and was in fact used to create something new, which as I understand it constitutes "fair use".

That's a possible argument if there were legal action and the author found a way to host the video himself, but youtube is not going to expose themselves to the risk.

I saw a post on his Facebook a couple weeks back that said he was planning on it. Ill try to find the post.

Edit, ok here we go.

Oct 16:

Unfortunately it looks like this series has finally made its way to the powers that be. As of now, Episode 2 is globally banned from YouTube and will be temporarily unavailable to all. YouTube gives you the option to dispute the copyright strike and I believe my video will become immediately available again once submitted. However, it may eventually become banned officially again shortly after. If anyone has dealt with anything like this or knows a bit more about the dispute process your help would be greatly appreciated. I apologized for the inconvenience. Hoping for the best. Thanks again for watching everyone!

Then later that day...

Alright, I'm up on Vimeo now (much better website by the way). I'm going to upload the other two Episodes and get back to working on 3.2. Enjoy and spread the word!

Just FYI, I've been emailing with the creator and it sounds like none of the major entities (NFL, Seahawks, ESPN) were part of the removal, but instead it was just a bot crawler that tagged the music. Either way, I've told him that whatever support he needs from myself and the .NET faithful he'll get.

Also note that we had a Q&A set for just before this time, and I should have that up hopefully soon after youtube gets is S**T together.